Economic evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review

Background Safe and effective vaccination is considered to be the most critical strategy to fight coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), leading to individual and herd immunity protection. We aimed to systematically review the economic evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination globally. Methods We performed a systematic search to identify relevant studies in two major databases (MEDLINE/PubMed and EBSCO) published until September 8, 2022. After deduplication, two researchers independently screened the study titles and abstracts according to pre-determined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The remaining full-text studies were assessed for eligibility. We assessed their quality of reporting using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 checklist and summarized and narratively presented the results. Results We identified 25 studies that assessed the economic evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination worldwide by considering several input parameters, including vaccine cost, vaccine efficacy, utility value, and the size of the targeted population. All studies suggested that COVID-19 vaccination was a cost-effective or cost-saving intervention for mitigating coronavirus transmission and its effect in many countries within certain conditions. Most studies reported vaccine efficacy values ranging from 65% to 75%. Conclusions Given the favorable cost-effectiveness profile of COVID-19 vaccines and disparities in affordability across countries, considering prioritization has become paramount. This review provides comprehensive insights into the economic evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination that will be useful to policymakers, particularly in highlighting preventive measures and preparedness plans for the next possible pandemic.


6
Specify all databases, registers, websites, organisations, reference lists and other sources searched or consulted to identify studies. Specify the date when each source was last searched or consulted.

Page 4
Search strategy 7 Present the full search strategies for all databases, registers and websites, including any filters and limits used.

Page 4
Selection process 8 Specify the methods used to decide whether a study met the inclusion criteria of the review, including how many reviewers screened each record and each report retrieved, whether they worked independently, and if applicable, details of automation tools used in the process.
Page 4

Data collection process
9 Specify the methods used to collect data from reports, including how many reviewers collected data from each report, whether they worked independently, any processes for obtaining or confirming data from study investigators, and if applicable, details of automation tools used in the process.

No. Item
Location where item is reported

Data items
10a List and define all outcomes for which data were sought. Specify whether all results that were compatible with each outcome domain in each study were sought (e.g. for all measures, time points, analyses), and if not, the methods used to decide which results to collect.
Page 5 10b List and define all other variables for which data were sought (e.g. participant and intervention characteristics, funding sources). Describe any assumptions made about any missing or unclear information.
Page 5

Study risk of bias assessment
11 Specify the methods used to assess risk of bias in the included studies, including details of the tool(s) used, how many reviewers assessed each study and whether they worked independently, and if applicable, details of automation tools used in the process.
Page 5

Effect measures
12 Specify for each outcome the effect measure(s) (e.g. risk ratio, mean difference) used in the synthesis or presentation of results.
Page 5

Synthesis methods
13a Describe the processes used to decide which studies were eligible for each synthesis (e.g. tabulating the study intervention characteristics and comparing against the planned groups for each synthesis (item 5)).
Page 5 13b Describe any methods required to prepare the data for presentation or synthesis, such as handling of missing summary statistics, or data conversions.

NA
13c Describe any methods used to tabulate or visually display results of individual studies and syntheses.
Page 5 13d Describe any methods used to synthesize results and provide a rationale for the choice(s). If meta-analysis was performed, describe the model(s), method(s) to identify the presence and extent of statistical heterogeneity, and software package(s) used.

NA
13e Describe any methods used to explore possible causes of heterogeneity among study results (e.g. subgroup analysis, meta-regression).

NA
13f Describe any sensitivity analyses conducted to assess robustness of the synthesized results.

Reporting bias assessment
14 Describe any methods used to assess risk of bias due to missing results in a synthesis (arising from reporting biases).

Topic No. Item
Location where item is reported

Study selection
16a Describe the results of the search and selection process, from the number of records identified in the search to the number of studies included in the review, ideally using a flow diagram.
Page 6 16b Cite studies that might appear to meet the inclusion criteria, but which were excluded, and explain why they were excluded.
Page 6

Study characteristics
17 Cite each included study and present its characteristics.
Page 6

Risk of bias in studies
18 Present assessments of risk of bias for each included study.

Results of individual studies
19 For all outcomes, present, for each study: (a) summary statistics for each group (where appropriate) and (b) an effect estimate and its precision (e.g. confidence/credible interval), ideally using structured tables or plots.

Results of syntheses
20a For each synthesis, briefly summarise the characteristics and risk of bias among contributing studies.

NA
20b Present results of all statistical syntheses conducted. If meta-analysis was done, present for each the summary estimate and its precision (e.g. confidence/credible interval) and measures of statistical heterogeneity. If comparing groups, describe the direction of the effect.

NA
20c Present results of all investigations of possible causes of heterogeneity among study results.

NA
20d Present results of all sensitivity analyses conducted to assess the robustness of the synthesized results.

Reporting biases
21 Present assessments of risk of bias due to missing results (arising from reporting biases) for each synthesis assessed.

Certainty of evidence
22 Present assessments of certainty (or confidence) in the body of evidence for each outcome assessed.

Discussion
23a Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence.

Topic No. Item
Location where item is reported 23c Discuss any limitations of the review processes used.
Page 12 23d Discuss implications of the results for practice, policy, and future research.
Page 12

Registration and protocol
24a Provide registration information for the review, including register name and registration number, or state that the review was not registered.
NA 24b Indicate where the review protocol can be accessed, or state that a protocol was not prepared.
NA 24c Describe and explain any amendments to information provided at registration or in the protocol.

Support
25 Describe sources of financial or non-financial support for the review, and the role of the funders or sponsors in the review.

Competing interests
26 Declare any competing interests of review authors. Page 12

Availability of data, code and other materials
27 Report which of the following are publicly available and where they can be found: template data collection forms; data extracted from included studies; data used for all analyses; analytic code; any other materials used in the review.